Review the Codex workflow migration (PR #61) before it becomes the repo's development process

Review the Codex workflow migration before it becomes the website repo's development process.

> _Assistant-drafted, unconfirmed_ — filed on request without the usual elicitation loop. Every section below is drafted from the PR contents, not from answers given by the human driver. Correct anything that misstates the intent before this is picked up.

## Business Value

> _Assistant-drafted, unconfirmed_

amypellegrini/jazzjamweb#61 adds 18 repository-owned Codex skills, two agent profiles (DEV/QA) and an `AGENTS.md` — roughly 1,900 added lines that describe how development, review, QA and release are carried out in this repo. It landed as an instruction-only PR with **no driving issue and no board item**, so nothing currently schedules a human read of it.

Without that read, the risk is that the process documentation diverges from the process actually enforced. A wrong or softened instruction here does not fail CI; it silently changes how future work gets built and accepted. Two site-specific guarantees are at stake: the shared-content rule (edits go to `content/shared.json` in the workbench and never to the generated `src/_data/shared.json`) and the no-hardcoded-pricing rule, which a Playwright test enforces.

Once reviewed and accepted, the Codex workflows carry the same gates as the Claude originals, and both agents can be driven against this repo with the same guarantees.

## Scope

**In scope**

- Review amypellegrini/jazzjamweb#61 in full: the 18 `.agents/skills/*/SKILL.md` files, `.codex/agents/dev.toml`, `.codex/agents/qa.toml`, `.codex/.gitignore`, and `AGENTS.md`.
- Review the requested workflow corrections across `.agents/`, `.codex/`, `.claude/`, `AGENTS.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, and `docs/workflow-lifecycle.md`; allow `.gitattributes` for text normalization. Product/site code remains untouched. Existing Claude entry points remain available; no retirement or deprecation is included.
- Confirm the process invariants survive the port: conventional commits, human approval gates, the reviewed-SHA handoff into In Testing.
- Confirm the release-notes routing is correct — the PR states Play Store release-note requests are routed to musicpracticepro's existing tooling rather than reimplemented here.
- Confirm the skills point shared-content edits at `content/shared.json` + `npm run sync` in the workbench, never at the generated `src/_data/shared.json`, and that they never introduce pricing copy.
- Record the review verdict and reviewed SHA on this issue, per the board's review/testing split.

**Out of scope**

- Site code changes, and retirement/deprecation of Claude skills. Corrections to existing Claude instructions needed to keep the two workflows consistent are in scope.
- The app half of the migration: amypellegrini/musicpracticepro#753 is reviewed under its own issue.
- Adopting Codex as the default driver for this repo. That is a separate decision; this issue only establishes that the ported workflows are correct.

## Acceptance Criteria

> _Assistant-drafted, unconfirmed_ — not elicited one at a time; this is a drafted set, not a confirmed one.

1. Every changed file in amypellegrini/jazzjamweb#61 has been read by a human, not sampled.
2. `git diff` confirms only workflow instructions/metadata are changed: `.agents/`, `.codex/`, `.claude/`, `AGENTS.md`, `CLAUDE.md`, `docs/workflow-lifecycle.md`, and `.gitattributes` where needed for LF normalization. Instruction replacements/deletions are permitted; product/site code and generated output are untouched, and existing Claude entry points are retained.
3. The conventional-commit requirement and each human approval gate present in the Claude skills are shown to be present in the Codex equivalents — or a deliberate, recorded decision explains each omission.
4. No skill instructs an edit to a generated file (`src/_data/shared.json`); shared-content changes are directed at `content/shared.json` and `npm run sync` in the workbench.
5. No skill introduces pricing copy or instructs anyone to add it.
6. The release-note routing to musicpracticepro is verified to work as described, or recorded as untested.
7. The review verdict and the reviewed SHA are posted on this issue.
8. CI is green on the PR head at the reviewed SHA.

## Manual Verification Steps

> _Assistant-drafted, unconfirmed_

1. `gh pr checkout 61 --repo amypellegrini/jazzjamweb`
2. `git diff --stat main...HEAD` — inspect every changed path against AC2; verify product/site code and generated output are untouched, and Claude entry points remain available.
3. Read each `.agents/skills/*/SKILL.md`, comparing against its Claude counterpart in `.claude/skills/`.
4. `grep -ri "shared.json" .agents/` — confirm every hit points at the workbench canonical source, not the generated web file.
5. `grep -riE "price|pricing|\$[0-9]" .agents/` — confirm no pricing copy.
6. Follow the release-notes skill's routing to musicpracticepro and confirm the referenced tooling exists.
7. Check CI status on the PR head.
8. Post the verdict plus the reviewed SHA on this issue.

## Related issues

- amypellegrini/musicpracticepro#753 — the app half of the same migration, reviewed under its own issue. Both should be accepted in the same iteration.
- amypellegrini/jazzjam-workbench#5 is the workbench migration PR. The coordinated work is tracked by amypellegrini/musicpracticepro#756. Review it alongside the children; merged-main pointer updates follow the child merges in a separate change.

## Open decisions

> _Assistant-drafted, unconfirmed_

- **`goal:*` label deliberately not applied.** Under the workbench's scope rule, no goal label means out of scope for `goal:revenue`. Developer-workflow tooling is arguably an enabler rather than revenue work, but that is the human driver's call — add `goal:revenue` if this should count in the delivery report.
- **No milestone set.** This repo's milestones are *User Manual*, *Post-production release* and *Monetisation*; none covers developer workflow. Assign one or create a milestone rather than leaving it unset permanently.

## Scope amendment — 09-09-2026

Updated to cover the requested PR review corrections: keep Claude and Codex gates consistent, share repository instructions, and normalize workflow text. The former additive-only/Claude-unchanged condition no longer describes the authorized fixes. This amendment does not record human review, QA, acceptance, or permission to retire Claude skills as completed.